![]() Over time that wore the paint away on the back of it. I think whoever owned it must have regularly opened the cabinet and cleaned the machine from the top, without getting the machine up to its working position. When I got the machine home and cleaned it up though, it was obvious the machine had been lightly used and the rest of the machine had not a mark on it. ![]() The back of the machine, which is all I’d seen in the shop, had the Singer logo partly worn away, which I’d taken as a sign the machine was well used. I bought the 401 with the intention of stripping it for spares – mainly the motor which would go in the poorly 411. The shop did a “PAT” electrical safety test on the machine and fitted a replacement speed controller as the original was defunct. I bought it – mainly as I was feeling guilty having been given lots of very good advice there about machines, but only ever paid pennies for small items like thread. I was offered an unrestored Singer 401 by my local sewing shop in Southampton. ![]() It performs as though it’s not run in yet and needs a good bit more use to run at its best. It operates effectively as a brand new machine. My second 411 had been in a cabinet and was hardly used. That one has had a long, hard life, but is very free running and still precise in the way it sews. I did a motor repair, which failed and the machine is now treadle only. “Warhorse”, which arrived first, had been dropped and damaged.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |